tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post7250403249157905007..comments2023-09-26T06:15:36.105-07:00Comments on Scharlott's Beacon – casting light into darkness: Bscharlotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06667913621618808338noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-37456483537007551822012-01-13T05:35:25.473-08:002012-01-13T05:35:25.473-08:00There is so much misinformation regarding ADHD tha...There is so much misinformation regarding ADHD that is scattered all over the internet. It can become frustrating to get even a simple diagnosis or be pointed in the right direction as to whether to notice ADHD in Adults or the Signs of ADHD in a child.<br /><br /><a href="http://living-with-your-adhd.com/" rel="nofollow">Symptoms of ADHD in Adults</a>ADHD in Teenagershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03443000682406399286noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-46104777534816113612011-10-24T12:07:13.079-07:002011-10-24T12:07:13.079-07:00My problems with your argument, Brad:
--You do no...My problems with your argument, Brad:<br /><br />--You do not have the opinion of even one MD in this field to support your views re fixing the ear. For a layman to do an internet search and draw a conclusion is far weaker than the opinion of an MD who has been around this particular block multiple times. If it was that easy, an MD degree would not take so long. Even MDs can differ, but an MD confirmation following a look at the actual ears would be a start.<br /><br />--There exist other MDs who HAVE looked at the ears and have said "no way." Of course they could be wrong. But so far they are more credible to me than your "first time out" conclusions that lack the background of training and experience in ear issues. Experience re practicality, outcome, etc., counts for more than reading about internet claims.<br /><br />--The size of the baby in the photos is also a factor in thinking there were two. <br /><br />--If the small baby was as small and fragile as the photos suggest, being fed via tube, any surgery on a cosmetic item like ear shape seems unlikely.<br /><br />--There is no evidence to suggest that any baby ever wore earforms or splints, which would be very visible. Only SP's use of the word "earforms" when she meant "earmarks." That could tell us nothing, or that she was thinking about earform treatment, or something else. But it is not support for the idea that any baby actually wore them.<br /><br />--The idea that you "believe" there is 95% probability of something does not mean there is 95% probability. It just means that is your opinion. Probability has to be based on more than a wholeheartedly held opinion. <br /><br />You could be right on all counts. But there is just too little expert opinion, too much heartfelt nonexpert opinion, and zero rock-solid data for me at this point. This is another case of SP facts that we cannot trust because they are not rock solid. And there are so many such factoids that one can build way too many scenarios upon them, without landing upon the actual one, which we still have no assurance of knowing.<br /><br />You brought up the idea of identifying a doll maker who claims to have supplied a reborm doll to SP. Did that pan out?Amy1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15250609551172928859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-2754536210641475332011-10-24T09:09:10.767-07:002011-10-24T09:09:10.767-07:00Ghost: With Wooten I was raising a question about ...Ghost: With Wooten I was raising a question about whether similarity in ears can point to familial relationship. But I *explicitly* said the similarity alone did not mean much of anything. I did not express a probability value. I did not "recant," because I never explicitly made the argument he was likely the father. (The title of the piece was supposed to have a question mark.)<br /><br />Ear printing has in fact been used in court and is a growing area of science:<br /><br />Book title:<br />Human Ear Recognition by Computer (Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition)<br /><br /><br />Review<br />From the reviews: "‘Human ear [recognition] is a new class of relatively stable biometrics,’ that has drawn the attention of not only researchers, but also forensics experts, criminologists, and security experts … . the book will be of great interest to researchers … . I recommend reading the book as a stepping stone to further research work on human ear recognition, from the viewpoints of both researchers and forensics experts." (J. Myerson, ACM Computing Reviews, December, 2008)<br />Product Description<br />At the frontier of research, this book offers complete coverage of human ear recognition. It explores all aspects of 3D ear recognition: representation, detection, recognition, indexing and performance prediction. It uses large datasets to quantify and compare the performance of various techniques. Features and topics include: Ear detection and recognition in 2D image; 3D object recognition and 3D biometrics; 3D ear recognition; Performance comparison and prediction.<br /><br />see: http://www.amazon.com/Recognition-Computer-Advances-Vision-Pattern/dp/1848001282<br /><br />I really don't understand where you are coming from. What part of the specific argument I have made are you taking issue with?Bscharlotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06667913621618808338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-71815466705186752002011-10-24T08:22:54.135-07:002011-10-24T08:22:54.135-07:00Brad, since you bring up the idea of the null hypo...Brad, since you bring up the idea of the null hypothesis in your new post, I'd like to take the opportunity to point out that in this post you are proposing a whole new science of, well, I'll call it "ear-printing". <br /><br />Your hypothesis is that your method of assigning geometric shapes to certain features of ears is a valid way of positively identifying individuals. <br /><br />The null hypothesis is that this method cannot identify individuals.<br /><br />I don't see any support for your idea that this method has any validity either in theory or in practice. You certainly haven't made the case that it works in individuals who may be related or in the same ethnic group. <br /><br />Even more damning is that you used this same argument (and later recanted it, if I recall correctly) in trying to make the case that Trig was related to Mike Wooten.<br />http://www.lauranovakauthor.com/1/post/2011/09/the-wootentrig-connection-by-prof-brad-scharlott.htmlGhostbusterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08892105963739502006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-32251385430242383932011-10-22T17:11:18.338-07:002011-10-22T17:11:18.338-07:00@ Ghostbuster and Brad-- I goofed, the Earwell sit...@ Ghostbuster and Brad-- I goofed, the Earwell site says that if the Earmolds(not surgery) are not started when the child is 1 week old, the success rate goes down to 50% or less.<br /><br />So I will ask my question again-- Brad, do you think that little Ruffles had the ear molds starting when he was a week old??? Because I simply don't think that would have been possible based on the photos we've seen.conscious at lasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07949603921251341461noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-58307021946377916752011-10-22T11:21:33.093-07:002011-10-22T11:21:33.093-07:00Brad, a couple of points:
First, you might want ...Brad, a couple of points: <br /><br />First, you might want to clarify that the interventions done to correct ear shape in newborns are NON-surgical. <br /><br />The earwells.com website has a ton of pictures, before and after, also in the testimonials part of the site, that support your thesis that the ruffled ears could have been corrected to the shape we see on the older Trig. Other splinting methods would be used on similar issues, so I don't think you have to make the case that a particular product or method was used. The important thing is that the method does not require any extraordinary means or risks, and the outcomes are consistent with Ruffles being Trig.<br /><br />Second, I think your logic is a bit off in claiming that you have "proof" that Ruffles is Trig. You've thrown cold water over the "different ears necessitates different babies" theory, but that's not the same thing as proving that they necessarily ARE the SAME baby. Nevertheless, Occam's Razor certainly says that should be our working theory.Ghostbusterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08892105963739502006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-66510517549616765162011-10-22T10:12:35.170-07:002011-10-22T10:12:35.170-07:00Thanks, B. I'm right concerning the ears. That...Thanks, B. I'm right concerning the ears. That's why I am doing this.Bscharlotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06667913621618808338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-85343495549581910582011-10-22T09:29:21.935-07:002011-10-22T09:29:21.935-07:00conscious at last said...
What I would like to und...conscious at last said...<br />What I would like to understand is how this thesis advances the goal of exposing the hoax known as BABYGATE?<br /><br />c.a.l., Brad's thesis advances finding the truth. <br /><br />Any mistake in our efforts to expose Babygate allows the MSM to write off the whole idea. Remember the picture of Bristol in the green sweater that was used in the original Daily Kos Babygate post? Once it was shown to be 2006, before Trig's time, it undermined the author's otherwise valid position.Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00529712664480394198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-9528109925804448162011-10-21T20:08:16.295-07:002011-10-21T20:08:16.295-07:00What I would like to understand is how this thesis...What I would like to understand is how this thesis advances the goal of exposing the hoax known as BABYGATE?<br /><br />What I see is a questionable formulation presented with the intent to create conflict amongst bloggers and move the discussion in a non-fruitful direction. <br /><br />The child that has been presented to the public as Trig is more than one person. Although I don't like these nicknames, for lack of a decent link at hand, "Batwing" Trig is simply NOT "Roundear" Trig. They are two different children. <br /><br />In addition, now you, Brad, have happily presented us with some information supporting the idea that there was a life-like doll used as well. Many of us have thought that for a while.<br /><br />So, whether or not Ruffles had surgery does not seem to be a critical issue. This is all separate and apart from the many questions that must be posed about this new thesis. <br />One of the Med-Surg sites that you link to states that if the surgery is not done when the baby is one week old, the success rate drops to below 50%. I don't think Ruffles was operated on when he was a week old - do you Brad?<br /><br />I think you have taken a wrong turn somewhere Brad. I hope you dropped some breadcrumbs for yourself to get back on track.conscious at lasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07949603921251341461noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-85127190567563793822011-10-21T20:04:19.198-07:002011-10-21T20:04:19.198-07:00Sorry about the formatting of the first message. M...Sorry about the formatting of the first message. My first message got eaten so I pasted it in again, but that zapped the formatting and I didn't notice. <br /><br />Here it is again:<br /><br />---------------<br /><br />Hey Brad. :-)<br /><br />I just noticed your post over at Politicalgates. It was interesting. <br /><br />Since you took my suggestion on board about the Bailey photo I was wondering if I could make another one to you on this topic?<br /><br />I am a very lazy person. I have ideas for things that could be done, but unfortunately never quite get to them. ....Story of my life I'm afraid. :-)<br /><br />...Anyway I'll tell you what the idea is and if you feel like it maybe you could pursue it.<br /><br />A lot of the reason people believe there were 2 babies (apart from the ears) is because they believe the different pictures show that the babies are wildly different sizes. I mostly think this too to be honest. A bit of time ago though I saw a post on Laura's blog and took the picture at the top of the post and made this picture in Photoshop:<br /><br />http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/24/lauranovakblogpostlevip.jpg/<br /><br />When I started to make it I thought that it would show that the 2 babies featured were different sizes, but it actually didn't really show that. That lead me to realize (although I knew it already) that photos can be quite deceptive. I know we all know this really. The terrible problem we have in trying to judge the babies size in the photos is that the baby is being held by different people in each picture. The cameras being used are using different lenses, and the subjects in the photos are at different distances and angles from the camera. This all makes it really hard to judge much from the photos. I worry that we could be deceiving ourselves. I want, though, to make sure I state that I have no actual firm opinion on how many babies there were. I'm interested to find the answer though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-9335820027031005642011-10-21T19:59:59.094-07:002011-10-21T19:59:59.094-07:00Here's my idea:
We need a better way to compa...Here's my idea:<br /><br />We need a better way to compare the size of the baby in each photo. To do this we have to compare the size of the baby against the size of the objects he is next to. These objects are various people and their body parts. To measure the size of the baby we need to know the relative sizes of the people to each other. This is very difficult, but I think a way to do it is to find a series of posed photographs where the people are standing next to each other in a line and the camera is at a distance (so distortions caused by the lens are minimised). This type of picture is often taken. Think Family pictures, posed pictures when people meet celebs, school pictures etc. So obviously everyone that has held trig is not going to be together in one posed picture, but surely many of them are. Imagine for instance there is a family pic of Levi and Mercede, and family pic of Levi and Bristol and a pic of the Palin Family including Palin's mom. You would take all these pictures composite them and resize them so that Levi from picture 1 is the same size as the Levi in picture 2 etc. You would then have one picture of all the people in a line. I'm not claiming this would be massively accurate, but it would give a good guide to the relative size of the people and the lengths of things like their arms. If we want to use actual units of measurement then we can estimate that by using the heights of the people. Several of them must have publicly stated their height.<br /><br />After doing this I would study each picture of Trig and mark dots on the composite picture created to show where Trig was relative to the person. I would then try and assess his size in each picture. this method may or may not show anything, but at least it adds a bit more science (....maybe pseudo science ;-) ) to the analysis and hopefully stops us all seeing what we want to see.<br /><br />Sorry for being long winded. I hope you understand what I mean. It's obviously just a suggestion of a method of investigation. your free to do what you want.<br /><br /><br />Nick. :-) <br /><br />.....I mean search4m0re. ....ah screw it. <br /><br />Nick. :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-77273040091802652562011-10-21T19:56:58.726-07:002011-10-21T19:56:58.726-07:00Hey Brad. :-)
I just noticed your post over at P...Hey Brad. :-)<br /><br />I just noticed your post over at Politicalgates. It was interesting. <br /><br />Since you took my suggestion on board about the Bailey photo I was wondering if I could make <br /><br />another one to you on this topic?<br /><br />I am a very lazy person. I have ideas for things that could be done, but unfortunately never <br /><br />quite get to them. ....Story of my life I'm afraid. :-)<br /><br />...Anyway I'll tell you what the idea is and if you feel like it maybe you could pursue it.<br /><br />A lot of the reason people believe there were 2 babies (apart from the ears) is because they <br /><br />believe the different pictures show that the babies are wildly different sizes. I mostly <br /><br />think this too to be honest. A bit of time ago though I saw a post on Laura's blog and took <br /><br />the picture at the top of the post and made this picture in Photoshop:<br /><br />http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/24/lauranovakblogpostlevip.jpg/<br /><br />When I started to make it I thought that it would show that the 2 babies featured were <br /><br />different sizes, but it actually didn't really show that. That lead me to realize (although <br /><br />I knew it already) that photos can be quite deceptive. I know we all know this really. The <br /><br />terrible problem we have in trying to judge the babies size in the photos is that the baby is <br /><br />being held by different people in each picture. The cameras being used are using different <br /><br />lenses, and the subjects in the photos are at different distances and angles from the camera. <br /><br /> This all makes it really hard to judge much from the photos. I worry that we could be <br /><br />deceiving ourselves. I want, though, to make sure I state that I have no actual firm opinion <br /><br />on how many babies there were. I'm interested to find the answer though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-56387311918879295832011-10-21T14:46:43.905-07:002011-10-21T14:46:43.905-07:00@Brad
You might've addressed this already and...@Brad<br /><br />You might've addressed this already and I missed it skimming over the comments, but...<br /><br />Is your conclusion that the surgery and/or therapy for Trig's ear was done prior to the RNC (Sept 1-3) but after the shower pics from May, 2008? <br /><br />A couple of questions: What was the latest date of "ruffled ear" photos that you have? From that particular date, would enough time have elapsed to allow for the healing of the "perfect" (rounded) ear at the RNC? Do those therapies/surgical methods that you researched typically produce these types of results in a similar time frame with 3-4 month old infants?<br /><br />I posted the same questions at Pogates, so I'll check there as well for your response. Thanks.<br /><br />jeffGrungyGriftyGimphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06527599734718069898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-33456459198970494442011-10-20T20:08:46.702-07:002011-10-20T20:08:46.702-07:00@Allison. My suggestion that hospital Trig, whose ...@Allison. My suggestion that hospital Trig, whose ears are covered, could be a reborn doll coexists with Brad's opinion that Ruffles and RNC Trig don't have to be different babies.Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00529712664480394198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-29060645504050370612011-10-20T18:24:42.676-07:002011-10-20T18:24:42.676-07:00Super work yet again, Brad! I'm loving it. Yo...Super work yet again, Brad! I'm loving it. You are so right when you remind people we only have pictures (and low quality ones, at that) on which to base any of our ideas. Your 30 ear sampling is a great way to make the point. <br /><br />Dolls, borrowed babies, hidden children, two Trigs -- all are much harder to imagine than surgery, IMHO. <br /><br />( Been trying to post this all day, and it keeps disappearing into cyberspace. Hope this shows up after I hit "Post Comment." )Allisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09280244244867361457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-46736543689363777722011-10-20T18:09:29.832-07:002011-10-20T18:09:29.832-07:00Thanks, VN!Thanks, VN!Bscharlotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06667913621618808338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-38620387386065525672011-10-20T18:07:15.942-07:002011-10-20T18:07:15.942-07:00You might consider posting some before+after photo...You might consider posting some before+after photos like these here:<br /><br />http://www.beconmedical.com/images/B-A.jpg<br /><br />http://www.facialsurgerycenter.com/images/earwell-before-afters.jpg<br /><br />Such examples certainly bolster the TriggyBear = Trig argument. <br /><br />I think you've established that deformed ears of infants can be corrected.Venefica Nigrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15925107852810040997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-89537399029928824192011-10-20T13:56:47.023-07:002011-10-20T13:56:47.023-07:00search4m0re : Perfect!search4m0re : Perfect!Bscharlotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06667913621618808338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-27283119705759028312011-10-20T13:55:49.914-07:002011-10-20T13:55:49.914-07:00No, Amy, it's Trig.No, Amy, it's Trig.Bscharlotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06667913621618808338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-26022112196981525502011-10-20T10:15:48.599-07:002011-10-20T10:15:48.599-07:00Let's say you prove conclusively one way or th...Let's say you prove conclusively one way or the other: one baby? two babies? Who will care if they already do not care to look at the pre-"birth" photos and see the obvious OBVIOUS O-B-V-I-O-U-S conclusion there.<br /><br />Either the high-level MSM blackout is working well, or people have lost interest, or both. Either one is enough to let SP get away with it and save McCain. Koch, GOP, et al. a lot of embarrassment.<br /><br />Search4m0re: I keep thinking Tripp (if born in late 2007 or early 2008) when I look at that Baily/office/shoulder photo.Amy1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15250609551172928859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-10042509520147117632011-10-20T07:17:47.959-07:002011-10-20T07:17:47.959-07:00In fact the Bailey picture is sort of like the mis...In fact the Bailey picture is sort of like the missing link. I think there are interesting things you could do with it if you want to spend a lot of time looking at ears.<br /><br />-Does the bottom part of the babies ear in Bailey's picture match the pictures of Trig's ear from the RNC?<br /><br />-Could the top part of the ear in Bailey's picture have formed into RNC Trig's ear?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-5787011502340666852011-10-20T06:54:45.543-07:002011-10-20T06:54:45.543-07:00Brad,
Can I suggest that you include the picture ...Brad,<br /><br />Can I suggest that you include the picture from Frank Bailey's book into your discussion about the ears?<br /><br />It seems to me that this picture supports your theory. The top of the babies ear is a bit messed up in the picture, but the ear lobe is formed properly. This supports your idea that the lobe in the baby shower pictures was just squashed by the way the baby was being held. Can I suggest that you add that picture to your series of pictures of ears side by side.<br /><br />:-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-2621664765450638612011-10-20T03:54:05.416-07:002011-10-20T03:54:05.416-07:00Amy: As I keep saying, until I rotated the picture...Amy: As I keep saying, until I rotated the picture of the ruffled ear and placed it next to older Trig's ear, it was very hard to visualize that the "hole" was part of the ear. Now it's not hard at all. I've asked Gryphen a couple of times to show my analysis to the same folks he talked to before, because I'll bet they would change their view. He won't, because he is afraid of the answer he might get, IMO.<br /><br />But the only people who could knowledgeably comment on the question you raise are the very few specialists who have used, for example, the Earwell Infant Care System:<br /><br />http://www.thebeautyofknowledge.com/non-invasive/earwell-infant-ear-correction-system/<br /><br />The onus is on Gryphen to convincingly show the ear is NOT fixable since he is the one charging deception. Truly the only way he could do that is to interview the sorts of specialists who have used these new technologies. HIS methodology was badly lacking, plus he badly misrepresented what was possible, perhaps by not researching the topic thoroughly enough.<br /><br />As I wrote above:<br /><br />I don’t have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the ears are the same, in order to meet my main objective. I simply have to show that proponents of the Two Trigs Theory can no longer claim they have made their case beyond a reasonable doubt. And if they have failed to do that, then the folks in the Trig Truther community need to stop accepting as an article of faith that a baby swap happened.Bscharlotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06667913621618808338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-20433267248757990872011-10-19T20:10:25.906-07:002011-10-19T20:10:25.906-07:00B -- thx for linking to that discussion. In the c...B -- thx for linking to that discussion. In the comments, Blade asks if there is a video right after the "birth," and I recall seeing the video of the same event where the SP/Todd/Trig headshot was taken (the office presentation): it showed SP BOUNCING out of a door in her pencil skirt with zero signs of postpartum issues. I remember this because of all the red flags that went up for me for the obvious reasons.<br /><br />I looked for that video a few mo ago and could not find it. No surprise if it's been deleted. That video might have given some clue to mobile vs immobile face, but the still shots from a video do have poor resolution, usually.<br /><br />I'd say if a dollmaker would say she sold SP a doll and had a photo of it (a quick look through these dollmaker sites shows they keep photos of "adopted" dolls), and it matched, then BINGO -- and it sure would make the dollmaker famous!Amy1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15250609551172928859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8762475984160052230.post-55596868010955876632011-10-19T19:44:26.572-07:002011-10-19T19:44:26.572-07:00Brad, here's an example of the reborn baby dol...Brad, here's an example of the reborn baby doll discussion:<br /><br />shesnohockeymom.blogspot.com/2010/07/<br />oh-you-beautiful-doll.html#disqus_threadBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00529712664480394198noreply@blogger.com